Engage: David vs. Goliath
When Delaware’s delegation read Virginia’s plan, they panicked. Virginia wanted representation based on population. Delaware had 60,000 people; Virginia had 750,000. Under this plan, small states would become vassals to large ones. The battle lines were drawn: large states versus small states, with the union’s survival at stake.
Explore: The Key Players
James Madison (Virginia): The “Father of the Constitution.” At 36, this quiet, scholarly man had prepared for months. He rarely spoke loudly but his ideas dominated. Madison believed in a strong national government that could override state laws. He saw state sovereignty as the fatal flaw in the Articles.
Alexander Hamilton (New York): At 30, the youngest delegate with the biggest ambitions. Born in the Caribbean, Hamilton had no state loyalty—he was truly nationalist. His plan (presented but ignored) called for senators and a president elected for life. Too radical even for this convention.
Benjamin Franklin (Pennsylvania): At 81, the eldest delegate and international celebrity. Too frail to stand, he wrote speeches others read. His role: the grand compromiser, using humor and wisdom to defuse tensions. When debates grew bitter, Franklin would tell a funny story to cool tempers.
Gouverneur Morris (Pennsylvania): The convention’s wordsmith who wrote the Constitution’s final language, including “We the People.” A peg-legged ladies’ man with aristocratic views, he spoke more than anyone else (173 times) and shaped the document’s actual phrasing.
Roger Sherman (Connecticut): A shoemaker turned lawyer who helped craft the crucial Connecticut Compromise. Plain-spoken and deeply religious, Sherman signed more founding documents than anyone: the Continental Association, Declaration, Articles, and Constitution.
William Paterson (New Jersey): Champion of small states who proposed the alternative New Jersey Plan. This Irish immigrant’s son understood what it meant to be overwhelmed by larger forces.
Explain: The Virginia Plan (Large State Plan)
Madison’s Virginia Plan proposed:
- Two houses of Congress, both based on population
- National legislature could veto state laws
- National executive chosen by legislature
- National judiciary with life terms
- Legislature could use force against states
This essentially eliminated state sovereignty. Large states loved it—they’d dominate. Small states saw it as death sentence.
Elaborate: The New Jersey Plan (Small State Plan)
After two weeks of debate, William Paterson countered with the New Jersey Plan:
- Keep the Articles’ structure (one state, one vote)
- Add limited powers: taxation, trade regulation
- Plural executive (committee, not single president)
- States remain sovereign
This preserved small state equality but didn’t solve the Articles’ weakness. Large states rejected it immediately.
The Fundamental Divide: This wasn’t just about size. It was about the nature of the union:
- Were they creating a national government ruling individuals?
- Or a federal government mediating between sovereign states?
Madison argued they were creating a nation, not a league. States were conveniences, not sovereignties. Luther Martin of Maryland responded that states entered the union as equals and must remain equals.
Evaluate: The Crisis Point
By late June, the convention nearly collapsed. Small states threatened to walk out. Large states threatened to form their own union. The heat was oppressive (remember, windows were sealed). Tempers flared.
The Hamilton Plan: In desperation, Hamilton presented his own plan: an elected monarch-like president serving for life, senators for life, state governors appointed by the national government. It was so extreme it made Madison’s plan look moderate—perhaps Hamilton’s intent.
Personal Dynamics: These men knew each other well. Many had served together in Congress or the army. This helped and hurt—they trusted each other enough to speak freely but also knew each other’s weaknesses. Hamilton and Madison, allies here, would soon become bitter enemies. Franklin and Washington, by their presence alone, kept others from walking out.
The debate revealed a truth: there was no perfect solution. Any system would require compromise. The question was whether these prideful, brilliant, stubborn men could find middle ground.
Key Vocabulary
- Proportional Representation: Seats allocated based on population size
- Equal Representation: Each state gets the same number of votes
- Federal: System dividing power between national and state governments
- National Supremacy: The principle that federal law overrides state law
Think About It
Madison prepared for months and dominated the intellectual debate, yet many of his key proposals failed. Hamilton was brilliant but too radical to be effective. Franklin spoke least but may have contributed most. What does this suggest about the relationship between intelligence, preparation, and political success?
Additional Resources
Primary Source: Read the complete Virginia Plan: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/vatexta.asp
This revolutionary proposal shows Madison’s vision for a strong national government that would have eliminated state sovereignty. Compare it with the final Constitution to see how much compromise was required.
Tomorrow: We’ll see how the Connecticut Compromise saved the convention and created the legislative structure we still use today.